Britain’s 10 most beautiful lost railway lines

[Recliner]

From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/

Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise

It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.

The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.

In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.

Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.

In numbers | Beeching cuts

Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963


1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.

One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.

Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.
Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

Unfortunately one of the things Beeching didn't get from British Rail
was a functioning crystal ball.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.
Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

Unfortunately one of the things Beeching didn't get from British Rail
was a functioning crystal ball.

He'd already left BR before the cuts were implemented, so probably had no say into decisions about selling the land,
etc. I think the MOT were keen to eliminate any chance that they'd re-open and need subsidy again, plus it wanted to
stop all maintenance spending on the closed sections.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.
Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

Unfortunately one of the things Beeching didn't get from British Rail
was a functioning crystal ball.

He'd already left BR before the cuts were implemented, so probably had no say into decisions about selling the land,
etc. I think the MOT were keen to eliminate any chance that they'd re-open and need subsidy again, plus it wanted to
stop all maintenance spending on the closed sections.

Whole point of the exercise was ultimately to save money, so selling off
redundant land was completely logical. Usage of trains, both passenger
and freight, was plummeting at the time so there was no valid reason to
retain redundant assets, just in case.

[Mark Goodge]

Post by Graeme Wall
It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.
Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the biggest bad decisions predated
Beeching. The first was the one made in the immediate aftermath of
nationalisation to continue to focus on steam power because British coal was
cheap and readily available. And then when the government came to its senses
and decided to go all in with diesel and electric, the Modernisation Plan
still didn't address any of the structural issues in BR's operations,
including long-outdated (even for the time!) working practices and the
common carrier requirement. It didn't help that the belated decision to
switch to diesel and electric was accompanied by a frantic rush to get rid
of steam, leading to several substandard procurement choices with some new
diesel classes being scrapped before the steam locomotives they were
supposed to replace.

If the government had presented Beeching with a better run railway to look
at, he probably wouldn't have recommended such drastic cuts. But we can't
change history, and neither could he. All we can do is recognise that the
worst of it wasn't his fault.

Mark

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Mark Goodge

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall
It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according to
the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was politicians
who actually implemented the cuts, and more.
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

Yes, agreed, as we’ve discussed many times. Many lines closed in other
countries around the same time, as rising car ownership and motorways meant
they weren’t needed.
Deep cuts were inevitable, but in some cases the wrong choices were made,
and in others, changing demand patterns meant that lines might have
reopened decades later if it hadn’t been made so difficult.

It's also worth bearing in mind that the biggest bad decisions predated
Beeching. The first was the one made in the immediate aftermath of
nationalisation to continue to focus on steam power because British coal was
cheap and readily available.

The problem was we didn't have the foreign currency to import enough
diesel oil or the technology in the immediate post-war era.

Post by Mark Goodge
And then when the government came to its senses
and decided to go all in with diesel and electric, the Modernisation Plan
still didn't address any of the structural issues in BR's operations,
including long-outdated (even for the time!) working practices and the
common carrier requirement. It didn't help that the belated decision to
switch to diesel and electric was accompanied by a frantic rush to get rid
of steam, leading to several substandard procurement choices with some new
diesel classes being scrapped before the steam locomotives they were
supposed to replace.
If the government had presented Beeching with a better run railway to look
at, he probably wouldn't have recommended such drastic cuts. But we can't
change history, and neither could he. All we can do is recognise that the
worst of it wasn't his fault.
Mark

[Marland]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Mark Goodge
It's also worth bearing in mind that the biggest bad decisions predated
Beeching. The first was the one made in the immediate aftermath of
nationalisation to continue to focus on steam power because British coal was
cheap and readily available.

The problem was we didn't have the foreign currency to import enough
diesel oil

Was that really the case for the diesel locos that would have come on
stream in place of the BR std class steam locos ,it wouldn’t have been a
rapid changeover displacing older designs.
If diesel was going to be expensive to source why did the government allow
towns and cities to abandon trams and allow planned conversions to
Trolleybuses to be changed to motor buses instead
London being the biggest example.
More like no one wanted to confront the mining union so soon after
nationalisation.

Post by Graeme Wall
or the technology in the immediate post-war era.

Well the Ivatt and Bulleid locos weren’t that bad were they? OK you may
have had to use locos like them in pairs but even the US was doing that
though one of them was cabless.

Britain was exporting electric locos though ,perhaps we should have done
some electrification instead and used the coal in power stations.

GH

[Charles Ellson]

Post by Marland

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Mark Goodge
It's also worth bearing in mind that the biggest bad decisions predated
Beeching. The first was the one made in the immediate aftermath of
nationalisation to continue to focus on steam power because British coal was
cheap and readily available.

The problem was we didn't have the foreign currency to import enough
diesel oil

Was that really the case for the diesel locos that would have come on
stream in place of the BR std class steam locos ,it wouldn’t have been a
rapid changeover displacing older designs.
If diesel was going to be expensive to source why did the government allow
towns and cities to abandon trams and allow planned conversions to
Trolleybuses to be changed to motor buses instead
London being the biggest example.
More like no one wanted to confront the mining union so soon after
nationalisation.

Trams and trolleybuses were affected by nationalisation of municipal
power supplies and the imposed cost of paying for more road than trams
actually used as well as the competitive effects of cheaper motor
vehicles. To some extent, also short-term accounting methods and "if
it is old it must be rubbish" which still persists in official control
of the transport world.
<snip>

[Charles Ellson]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 02:17:42 +0000, Charles Ellson

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Marland

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Mark Goodge
It's also worth bearing in mind that the biggest bad decisions predated
Beeching. The first was the one made in the immediate aftermath of
nationalisation to continue to focus on steam power because British coal was
cheap and readily available.

The problem was we didn't have the foreign currency to import enough
diesel oil

Was that really the case for the diesel locos that would have come on
stream in place of the BR std class steam locos ,it wouldn’t have been a
rapid changeover displacing older designs.
If diesel was going to be expensive to source why did the government allow
towns and cities to abandon trams and allow planned conversions to
Trolleybuses to be changed to motor buses instead
London being the biggest example.
More like no one wanted to confront the mining union so soon after
nationalisation.

Trams and trolleybuses were affected by nationalisation of municipal
power supplies

along with conversion of existing DC public supplies to AC

Post by Charles Ellson
and the imposed cost of paying for more road than trams
actually used as well as the competitive effects of cheaper motor
vehicles. To some extent, also short-term accounting methods and "if
it is old it must be rubbish" which still persists in official control
of the transport world.
<snip>

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall
It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according
to the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was
politicians who actually implemented the cuts, and more.

Regarding the "and more", that's the Varsity Line, whose closure is
almost always falsely blamed on Beeching.

Post by Graeme Wall
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

And when we huge numbers of staff cuts, that's because rural stations
with a handful of freight trains (empty because it had all fled to road)
could employ a dozen staff just for that freight. It's not about the one
person selling passenger tickets.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according
to the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was
politicians who actually implemented the cuts, and more.

Regarding the "and more", that's the Varsity Line, whose closure is
almost always falsely blamed on Beeching.

Yes, the actual cuts differed from his recommendations. Some he condemned survived, as vice versa. And, of course, quite
a few lines had already closed before his time, but he's routinely blamed for them, too.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

And when we huge numbers of staff cuts, that's because rural stations
with a handful of freight trains (empty because it had all fled to road)
could employ a dozen staff just for that freight. It's not about the one
person selling passenger tickets.

Yes, I think every station had a manager, a ticket seller, probably a signaller, maybe a porter...

I've seen that in trips round central Europe, where they still tend to have the over-staffing that has long gone from
here. Every station has a smartly uniformed manager with a red hat, and several other staff members, even if very few
trains still run.

[Theo]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
It has to be remembered, Beeching only made recommendations according
to the brief he was given by the government of the day. It was
politicians who actually implemented the cuts, and more.

Regarding the "and more", that's the Varsity Line, whose closure is
almost always falsely blamed on Beeching.

Yes, the actual cuts differed from his recommendations. Some he condemned survived, as vice versa. And, of course, quite
a few lines had already closed before his time, but he's routinely blamed for them, too.

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall
One of the major problems was that British Railways (as was) had no
clear idea of what it had or what it cost to run and Beeching had to
make his own estimations of costs and receipts.

And when we huge numbers of staff cuts, that's because rural stations
with a handful of freight trains (empty because it had all fled to road)
could employ a dozen staff just for that freight. It's not about the one
person selling passenger tickets.

Yes, I think every station had a manager, a ticket seller, probably a signaller, maybe a porter...
I've seen that in trips round central Europe, where they still tend to have the over-staffing that has long gone from
here. Every station has a smartly uniformed manager with a red hat, and several other staff members, even if very few
trains still run.

One big problem was that working class wages were rising faster than
inflation in the 50s and 60s. So there was not just 1940s levels of
overstaffing, but even maintaining the status quo was becoming increasingly
expensive in real terms. That meant the railways were caught in a pincer:
increasing wages while at the same time declining usage due to the growth of
car traffic.

Increased automation could have addressed the wages issue, but that would
have required investment - and there was no money for that, apart from the
limited cases that Beeching described in his second report.

(has anyone written about this period from an industrial relations point of
view? ISTM that the unions would have resisted de-manning, but then Beeching
must have been a big shock to them)

Theo

[Bevan Price]

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.

Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have been
built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and could
probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.

In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

[Charles Ellson]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them. If not used as
increased selling space then I would expect some to turn into Argos
branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the current
shops) or rented out to fast food operators. The previous clearout
with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they sold "live" but were
later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them.

The rumour is a Starbucks, although that would then be the third in the
town(sic) in addition to up to a dozen other multinationals and
locally-owned clones. It would also destroy the character of what used
to be a low-cost cafe style gathering place for the occupants of
numerous retirement homes (both council and private) within a few
hundred yards.

Post by Charles Ellson
If not used as increased selling space then I would expect some to turn
into Argos branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the
current shops)

Some might, although all the ones I'm familiar with already have both a
Cafe and an Argos shop-in-a-shop.

Post by Charles Ellson
or rented out to fast food operators.

The original ASDA superstore (in Nottingham) used to run its own cafe,
but about twenty years ago flipped it to a MacDonalds franchise.

Post by Charles Ellson
The previous clearout with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they
sold "live" but were later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

[Tweed]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them.

The rumour is a Starbucks, although that would then be the third in the
town(sic) in addition to up to a dozen other multinationals and
locally-owned clones. It would also destroy the character of what used
to be a low-cost cafe style gathering place for the occupants of
numerous retirement homes (both council and private) within a few
hundred yards.

Post by Charles Ellson
If not used as increased selling space then I would expect some to turn
into Argos branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the
current shops)

Some might, although all the ones I'm familiar with already have both a
Cafe and an Argos shop-in-a-shop.

Post by Charles Ellson
or rented out to fast food operators.

The original ASDA superstore (in Nottingham) used to run its own cafe,
but about twenty years ago flipped it to a MacDonalds franchise.

Post by Charles Ellson
The previous clearout with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they
sold "live" but were later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

[Charles Ellson]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them.

The rumour is a Starbucks, although that would then be the third in the
town(sic) in addition to up to a dozen other multinationals and
locally-owned clones. It would also destroy the character of what used
to be a low-cost cafe style gathering place for the occupants of
numerous retirement homes (both council and private) within a few
hundred yards.

Post by Charles Ellson
If not used as increased selling space then I would expect some to turn
into Argos branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the
current shops)

Some might, although all the ones I'm familiar with already have both a
Cafe and an Argos shop-in-a-shop.

Post by Charles Ellson
or rented out to fast food operators.

The original ASDA superstore (in Nottingham) used to run its own cafe,
but about twenty years ago flipped it to a MacDonalds franchise.

Post by Charles Ellson
The previous clearout with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they
sold "live" but were later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Some shops seem to have been sold on rather than closed.

[Tweed]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them.

The rumour is a Starbucks, although that would then be the third in the
town(sic) in addition to up to a dozen other multinationals and
locally-owned clones. It would also destroy the character of what used
to be a low-cost cafe style gathering place for the occupants of
numerous retirement homes (both council and private) within a few
hundred yards.

Post by Charles Ellson
If not used as increased selling space then I would expect some to turn
into Argos branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the
current shops)

Some might, although all the ones I'm familiar with already have both a
Cafe and an Argos shop-in-a-shop.

Post by Charles Ellson
or rented out to fast food operators.

The original ASDA superstore (in Nottingham) used to run its own cafe,
but about twenty years ago flipped it to a MacDonalds franchise.

Post by Charles Ellson
The previous clearout with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they
sold "live" but were later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Some shops seem to have been sold on rather than closed.

I think most shops changed hands one way or another and continue as
pharmacies.

[Charles Ellson]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 11:11:28 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed

Post by Charles Ellson
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Bevan Price
Beeching was largely the "fall guy", taking the blame for doing what he
had been told to do by Transport Minister Ernest Marples.
Yes - some lines were financial basket cases that should never have
been built, and needed to be closed. But others were marginal cases and
could probably have been saved -- but few attempts were made to make
economies; the attitude of some politicians - and possibly parts of the
senior civil service was that closure was the only acceptable solution.

It can be difficult to Cherry-pick potential survivors in isolation, as
there can be economies of scale which are lost.
In a slightly different industry, our local Sainsbury's is losing its
cafe, despite being very well used. But the firm has decided to close
*all* of them, and keeping half a dozen going in isolation would be very
expensive.

It would be interesting to see what replaces them.

The rumour is a Starbucks, although that would then be the third in the
town(sic) in addition to up to a dozen other multinationals and
locally-owned clones. It would also destroy the character of what used
to be a low-cost cafe style gathering place for the occupants of
numerous retirement homes (both council and private) within a few
hundred yards.

Post by Charles Ellson
If not used as increased selling space then I would expect some to turn
into Argos branches (my local ones are crammed into the corner of the
current shops)

Some might, although all the ones I'm familiar with already have both a
Cafe and an Argos shop-in-a-shop.

Post by Charles Ellson
or rented out to fast food operators.

The original ASDA superstore (in Nottingham) used to run its own cafe,
but about twenty years ago flipped it to a MacDonalds franchise.

Post by Charles Ellson
The previous clearout with Sainsburys was their pharmacies which they
sold "live" but were later closed by Lloyds Pharmacy.

Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Some shops seem to have been sold on rather than closed.

I think most shops changed hands one way or another and continue as
pharmacies.

I went to collect a prescription from the branch in my local
Sainsburys and it was er... just empty like the Marie Celeste with
nothing to explain what had happened.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry
Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year.

I didn't know that, thanks for the info.

Post by Tweed
Exists now as only an online brand.

I get spammed by that on Facebook, ironically for one of the original
most-spammed products on Usenet/email back in the day: Blue pills.

[Colum Mylod]

On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
...

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry
Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Definitely still exists as a very understaffed monopoly in a nearby
hospital. 1 pharmacist, 1 assistant for all prescriptions across a
large hospital. Long waits for NHS prescriptions, but plenty of coffee
competition for the long waits.

[Tweed]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
...

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry
Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Definitely still exists as a very understaffed monopoly in a nearby
hospital. 1 pharmacist, 1 assistant for all prescriptions across a
large hospital. Long waits for NHS prescriptions, but plenty of coffee
competition for the long waits.

Perhaps not for much longer

https://www.pharmacymagazine.co.uk/business-news/former-lloydspharmacy-parent-exits-from-64-hospital-contracts

(August 2024)
The former parent company of the now-defunct LloydsPharmacy has announced
it is exiting from its LloydsPharmacy-branded hospital pharmacy sites.

Hallo Healthcare advised staff this morning that the LloydsPharmacy
Healthcare Services is to cease operating its 64 pharmacy sites, which span
acute trusts, mental health providers, hospitals and hospices.

[ColinR]

Post by Tweed

Post by Charles Ellson
On Tue, 25 Feb 2025 08:40:35 -0000 (UTC), Tweed
...

Post by Tweed

Post by Roland Perry
Lloyds Pharmacy has long struggled with its bricks and mortar operation,
and closed most of its High Street stores in favour of effectively
pop-up shops in GP Surgeries, and then the deal with Sainsburys. My GP's
Lloyds was often closed "due to staff shortage", and has now been taken
over by the GP Practice itself.

Lloyds Pharmacy went bust last year. Exists now as only an online brand.

Definitely still exists as a very understaffed monopoly in a nearby
hospital. 1 pharmacist, 1 assistant for all prescriptions across a
large hospital. Long waits for NHS prescriptions, but plenty of coffee
competition for the long waits.

Perhaps not for much longer
https://www.pharmacymagazine.co.uk/business-news/former-lloydspharmacy-parent-exits-from-64-hospital-contracts
(August 2024)
The former parent company of the now-defunct LloydsPharmacy has announced
it is exiting from its LloydsPharmacy-branded hospital pharmacy sites.
Hallo Healthcare advised staff this morning that the LloydsPharmacy
Healthcare Services is to cease operating its 64 pharmacy sites, which span
acute trusts, mental health providers, hospitals and hospices.

But a few bits remain - from the above link:

"According to the Hallo Healthcare group’s website, wholesaler AAH,
LloydsPharmacy Clinical Home Care and Lloyds Online Doctor are the
remaining elements of the business."

[Marland]

Post by Recliner
From
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/beautiful-lost-railways-britain/
Sixty years on, we remember 10 routes lost to Beeching’s axe, and trace
their remains across the vistas that once thrummed with their noise
It is a rare political decision that is greeted with universal support. But
it is surely fair to argue that few of the “big calls” in Britain’s recent
history have been quite as derided – both at the time and in retrospect –
as the restructuring of the railways in the mid-1960s.
The name of Richard Beeching echoes loudly here. Appointed by the Macmillan
government in spite of a CV that made no mention of the rail industry, he
was the engineer and civil servant who was charged with examining the
labyrinth of lines that had mushroomed across the country during the
Victorian train boom, and pruning the routes that he deemed unnecessary as
well as unprofitable. This he did, producing a pair of reports – the first
in March 1963; the second in February 1965 – that took a machete to the
thicket. The first identified 2,363 stations and 5,000 miles of line for
closure – figures that amounted to 67,700 jobs, 55 per cent of stations,
and 30 per cent of the network. The second sealed the deal with its
proposed diverting of investment to what was left. The effects were
immediate, and seismic. The term “Beeching axe” has been used ever since.
In his defence, there was an element of method to what was perceived as
Beeching’s madness: some of the 19th-century routes pared back by his knife
had certainly outlived their viability. And in later life, he was sanguine
about both his “achievements” and the opprobrium they had brought him,
musing that, “I’ll always be looked upon as the axe man, but it was
surgery, not mad chopping.” Nevertheless, his reforms caused outrage, left
rural communities isolated – and still provoke mutterings of discontent,
six decades later.
Beeching’s ghost can also be a spark for nostalgia – for a romantic vision
of a vanished Britain; of steam trains roaring through tunnels, their hoots
and toots audible long before they slowed into picturesque village
stations. Maybe this is rose-tinted thinking, forgetting the delays and the
dirt – perhaps even imagining a stained-glass version of the country which
never really existed. However, on the 60th anniversary of the second
report, this article picks out 10 railway lines lost to the snip of those
bureaucratic scissors, and traces their remains across the vistas that once
thrummed with their noise and smoke.
In numbers | Beeching cuts
Stations closed 2,363 (55% of UK total)
Disused line 5,000 miles
Job losses 67,700
Network capacity cut 30%
Estimated savings approx. £30 million
Estimated losses >£100 million
First Beeching report published 27 March 1963
1. Great Central Main Line
2. Moray Coast Railway
3. King’s Lynn to Wisbech Line
4. York-Beverley Line
5. Carmarthen to Aberystwyth Line
6. North Devon and Cornwall Junction Light Railway
7. Wealden Line
8. Waverley Line
9. Durham-Bishop Auckland Line
10. Somerset & Dorset Joint Railway

I wonder what the criteria was for being “most beautiful”?

Out of those 10 I’m only familiar with one ,the NDCJLR at No5 having grown
up near it and travelled on a good part it .
Interesting ,yes , idiosyncratic yes, a line part built on the path of a
3ft gauge line with a new build section opened as late as 1925 when lorries
and buses had already started to serve the sparse population of the area.
But I would not describe it as beautiful except maybe the first couple of
miles out of Torrington which ran through a wooded valley as far as
Watergate Halt ,the rest passed through the poorer lands of mid North Devon
which are basically wet muddy fields with lots of rush clumps .There must
be many more beautiful routes.

GH